Unexpected solicitor’s fees
Discussion
Hi, I was involved in an accident some time ago, for which I’ve just received a cheque for personal injury. This cheque was unexpectedly minus 25%, which my solicitors now advise me they’re entitled to do to help cover their expenses. This is despite the fact that I had legal expenses cover through my insurance company.
Just before I agreed to the settlement, I asked my solicitor the explicit question whether the quoted amount is what I’d receive with ‘no hidden charges’; to which he agreed it was. If he’d disclosed the 25% fee, I would definitely have questioned why it wasn’t covered by the 3rd party, and may well have altered my decision.
It’s a reasonable amount and so I’m pretty annoyed. Question is, is it worth pursuing with the legal ombudsman, or will I just get the usual response that it was fully covered in the 28 pages of small print within the original agreement? As far as I can see, even the dodgiest claim management firms state you get the full compensation amount, and that they claim their fees from the 3rd party…
Just before I agreed to the settlement, I asked my solicitor the explicit question whether the quoted amount is what I’d receive with ‘no hidden charges’; to which he agreed it was. If he’d disclosed the 25% fee, I would definitely have questioned why it wasn’t covered by the 3rd party, and may well have altered my decision.
It’s a reasonable amount and so I’m pretty annoyed. Question is, is it worth pursuing with the legal ombudsman, or will I just get the usual response that it was fully covered in the 28 pages of small print within the original agreement? As far as I can see, even the dodgiest claim management firms state you get the full compensation amount, and that they claim their fees from the 3rd party…
I would love to read the '28 pages' of small print, and know whether it was a conditional fee agreement that I signed... but did I keep a copy? Of course I didn't 
But surely there's an element of disclosure here. As stated, I asked the solicitor whether the amount he quoted was what I'd receive, with no hidden deductions, and he said that it was. Basically he was mistaken or he lied - shocking as that may seem
But surely there's an element of disclosure here. As stated, I asked the solicitor whether the amount he quoted was what I'd receive, with no hidden deductions, and he said that it was. Basically he was mistaken or he lied - shocking as that may seem
chazwind said:
I would love to read the '28 pages' of small print, and know whether it was a conditional fee agreement that I signed... but did I keep a copy? Of course I didn't
Ask for a copy?chazwind said:
But surely there's an element of disclosure here. As stated, I asked the solicitor whether the amount he quoted was what I'd receive, with no hidden deductions, and he said that it was. Basically he was mistaken or he lied - shocking as that may seem
They might say they weren't hidden, they were clearly mentioned in the 28 pages of T's & C's. Have you raised the point with them that you were told you'd be paid in full?You could also query it with your insurance company legal assistance.
To the OP, I would query this with them,
Mention to them that you spoke to the solicitor about the fee (especially if you did this over the phone as it may be recorded their end) - ask if calls are recorded if you did call.
If they insist on the 25% fee then ask them to show you in their T&C where it says on the 25%
Mention to them that you spoke to the solicitor about the fee (especially if you did this over the phone as it may be recorded their end) - ask if calls are recorded if you did call.
If they insist on the 25% fee then ask them to show you in their T&C where it says on the 25%
I'm fairly certain that this is how no win, no fee works these days. IIRC, what used to happen was that you'd get your damages and the legal party working for you would charge extortionate fees to the other side on top of your damages. Now, to try and put a stop to that, your legal party can only claim from you and can only claim up to 25% of your damage award.
Click me
Long story, short, you need to find out what you signed.
Click me
Long story, short, you need to find out what you signed.
AyBee said:
I'm fairly certain that this is how no win, no fee works these days. IIRC, what used to happen was that you'd get your damages and the legal party working for you would charge extortionate fees to the other side on top of your damages. Now, to try and put a stop to that, your legal party can only claim from you and can only claim up to 25% of your damage award.
Click me
Long story, short, you need to find out what you signed.
Thanks for the link. It looks like mine was a damages-based agreement. Basically means that 25% of my compensation can be deducted for additional costs - the same as any no-win no-fee claim. So what's the point of paying £25 for legal expenses cover?!? None, apparently. It's completely redundant, and a rip off.Click me
Long story, short, you need to find out what you signed.
richs2891 said:
To the OP, I would query this with them,
Mention to them that you spoke to the solicitor about the fee (especially if you did this over the phone as it may be recorded their end) - ask if calls are recorded if you did call.
If they insist on the 25% fee then ask them to show you in their T&C where it says on the 25%
T&C's are meant to mislead the customer - that's what they're designed to do apparently Mention to them that you spoke to the solicitor about the fee (especially if you did this over the phone as it may be recorded their end) - ask if calls are recorded if you did call.
If they insist on the 25% fee then ask them to show you in their T&C where it says on the 25%
It's being straight out lied to that I really object to. It's a long shot, but I'll follow your advice and ask for a recording of the phone call.
But after just meeting with My solicitor on another matter which I have a conditional fee Agreement in place ( no win no fee) they have confirmed in writing that if you have signed before the new agreements came in to place you should fall under the old way and they can claim damages from the other side . This is what is happening to my self but this is for a Medical negligence case
chazwind said:
T&C's are meant to mislead the customer - that's what they're designed to do apparently
It's being straight out lied to that I really object to. It's a long shot, but I'll follow your advice and ask for a recording of the phone call.
No. T&Cs are there for you to read, and accept, as this is what you are legally agreeing to and the T&Cs will define what will happen.It's being straight out lied to that I really object to. It's a long shot, but I'll follow your advice and ask for a recording of the phone call.
Misleading T&Cs are of course unlawful. However, from what you have said, this is not the problem, it seems you have not read them and discarded them.
You may find that the solicitor has outright lied. You may also find that he was under the impression that you knew that there was a 25% fee, as of course they told you in writing. So, when he's referring to no hidden charges, he's presuming you know about the fee already.
Edited by JustinP1 on Wednesday 6th May 15:50
JustinP1 said:
No. T&Cs are there for you to read, and accept, as this is what you are legally agreeing to and the T&Cs will define what will happen.
Misleading T&Cs are of course unlawful. However, from what you have said, this is not the problem, it seems you have not read them and discarded them.
You may find that the solicitor has outright lied. You may also find that he was under the impression that you knew that there was a 25% fee, as of course they told you in writing. So, when he's referring to no hidden charges, he's presuming you know about the fee already.
All laudable sentiments, but T&C's are specifically designed to be unreadable, impenetrable and misleading (albeit not in the eyes of the law). Companies want you to (at most) try and read the first couple of sentences, get completely lost, and then just skip to 'where do I sign?'. That's what 90% of people do, and it's no accident.Misleading T&Cs are of course unlawful. However, from what you have said, this is not the problem, it seems you have not read them and discarded them.
You may find that the solicitor has outright lied. You may also find that he was under the impression that you knew that there was a 25% fee, as of course they told you in writing. So, when he's referring to no hidden charges, he's presuming you know about the fee already.
Edited by JustinP1 on Wednesday 6th May 15:50
chazwind said:
All laudable sentiments, but T&C's are specifically designed to be unreadable, impenetrable and misleading (albeit not in the eyes of the law). Companies want you to (at most) try and read the first couple of sentences, get completely lost, and then just skip to 'where do I sign?'. That's what 90% of people do, and it's no accident.
The engagement letter should be very clear. I'd get a copy of that before doing anything else.Jasandjules said:
You asked what was the point of your insurance? Well, you are not paying the full legal fees are you?
In hindsight, I'd be in exactly the same position with or without legal expenses insurance - having it gave me absolutely no benefit whatsoever. It's a complete waste of money.chazwind said:
JustinP1 said:
No. T&Cs are there for you to read, and accept, as this is what you are legally agreeing to and the T&Cs will define what will happen.
Misleading T&Cs are of course unlawful. However, from what you have said, this is not the problem, it seems you have not read them and discarded them.
You may find that the solicitor has outright lied. You may also find that he was under the impression that you knew that there was a 25% fee, as of course they told you in writing. So, when he's referring to no hidden charges, he's presuming you know about the fee already.
All laudable sentiments, but T&C's are specifically designed to be unreadable, impenetrable and misleading (albeit not in the eyes of the law). Companies want you to (at most) try and read the first couple of sentences, get completely lost, and then just skip to 'where do I sign?'. That's what 90% of people do, and it's no accident.Misleading T&Cs are of course unlawful. However, from what you have said, this is not the problem, it seems you have not read them and discarded them.
You may find that the solicitor has outright lied. You may also find that he was under the impression that you knew that there was a 25% fee, as of course they told you in writing. So, when he's referring to no hidden charges, he's presuming you know about the fee already.
Edited by JustinP1 on Wednesday 6th May 15:50
By your own admission you didn't read it and you lost it!
As desolate has said, appointment letters have to be in very clear terms. I have read them myself, they must set out what they are employed to do in simple terms, and how much they get paid for what, and what your risks are.
That's in addition to any T&Cs that are added at the end.
chazwind said:
In hindsight, I'd be in exactly the same position with or without legal expenses insurance - having it gave me absolutely no benefit whatsoever. It's a complete waste of money.
Actually, you did not have to pay the full fees did you? If you could not have paid them up front, a solicitor may have taken on your case on the basis of an uplift AND their fees. JustinP1 said:
But how do you know that that's the case in this case here?
By your own admission you didn't read it and you lost it!
As desolate has said, appointment letters have to be in very clear terms. I have read them myself, they must set out what they are employed to do in simple terms, and how much they get paid for what, and what your risks are.
That's in addition to any T&Cs that are added at the end.
No, I said didn't take a copy of what I signed, which I'd agree is just as bad By your own admission you didn't read it and you lost it!
As desolate has said, appointment letters have to be in very clear terms. I have read them myself, they must set out what they are employed to do in simple terms, and how much they get paid for what, and what your risks are.
That's in addition to any T&Cs that are added at the end.
Interesting about the appointment letter - I'm pretty certain that I didn't receive one (at least as you described it - at no point did they advise me about their charges, and I wasn't interested as it was all 'covered' with the legal cover insurance). I gave the solicitor's details to my insurer, who dealt with them direct to agree T&C's. All I gave to the solicitor was the accident details.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff